What can I write if I don't want to write BME / BAME etc

[HellonHeels]

Is Global Majority better?

Please help, not trying for woke points, just want to be inclusive and use the best language.

No style guide in my institution, other reports use BAME.

Yeah but @TottersBlankly "Minoritized" or "racially minoritized" works precisely because it's something imposed on those people by systems of colonial oppression etc - it acknowledges that they are not a minority, yet they are made to feel like one, and therefore surfaces that this is a choice and we could act differently.

I would say that, or global majority, but probably racially minoritized is more comprehensible because global majority still is not a term known by everyone, it's a bit newer, as this thread illustrates.

It's to analyse whether black people, disabled people, gay people access healthcare/education/vote/whatever in the same proportions as white/able bodied/straight/ whatever.

If I don't know the personal characteristics of students at my university for example how can I measure whether black or mixed race or vision impaired or bisexual applicants /students are getting fair access or equal provision or equal opportunities for x, y or z?

Those who haven't heard of Global Majority - I'm staggered about that - what sectors are you in?

Academia, public health even. I sometimes work for the WHO... but we talk biology not social factors in our reports for them. Suppose it was a report on info from survey of British people, when we invited people to self-identify we'd offer them words like "white", "black" or "Asian". We'd probably say... ethnic minority if we needed to group them together.

If I don't know the personal characteristics of students at my university for example how can I measure whether black or mixed race or vision impaired or bisexual applicants /students are getting fair access or equal provision or equal opportunities for x, y or z?

If you need to think about if they are getting fair access or not, the society is already corrupt. But by doing the survey, you maybe othering those students again. Like I said, I don't think about my ethnicity, unless I was asked.
Same for my dc. He is a mixed race child, but he was born in UK. So I don't think he considers anything different from other children. But when he attends the hospital appointments, it's always asked his ethnicity on the form. I do it now, but once he is old enough, he will be made to think he is different every time he has to answer the question.( or maybe not, I don't know, he just take it as a fact.)

Excludes many First Nations, which is interesting.

In our training- ‘black’

Another thing that was bugging my mind was when I watched people talking about former president Barack Obama'.
He was the black President. But in reality, he is a mixed race, white mother and black father. He can be called black, but never be called white.

Same for my son. He is half white half Asian. He can be called Asian, or mixed race, but never be called white.
The fact white people needs to be pure white to be called a white person, but Asian or Black or other people doesn't need to be 100% pure says a lot about society, imo.

To cover everybody?

How does the change happen? Without the data?

i agree with you in that my mixed race children haven’t had to worry too much. Mainly because the area and schools they attend. Until they’re asked the question on forms.

The fact white people needs to be pure white to be called a white person, but Asian or Black or other people doesn't need to be 100% pure says a lot about society, imo.

I don’t think this is really true anymore. I read a lot of opinion pieces saying Obama wasn’t “true black”, but “mostly white” The same with Meghan Markle…many complaints saying that shes not black at all so shouldn’t be publishing anything about being black and in the British royal family.

You see this in Hollywood too, complaints that a certain actress or actor isn’t “black enough” to play the part of a black character- notably the Rock/Dwayne Johnson and Zendaya have had this happen to them. So obviously mixed race people are in fact sometimes viewed as more white than their other race(s).

The idea too you have to be pure white to be called a white person isn’t exactly correct. Elizabeth Warren had DNA tests showing she was 1-3% Native American but it was a huge scandal for her to claim any Native American ancestry at all. She was roundly criticised and called “whiter than white”.

White passing is entirely based on this fact that many mixed race people do pass for white, are called white, are viewed as white…by everyone.

These are simply observations of opinions I have seen published, these do not represent my opinions at all.

If you need to think about if they are getting fair access or not, the society is already corrupt.

But how do I know? It may be that we're bloody brilliant at access to all ethnicities. It may be that we're utterly abysmal. Unless we collect some data we have no way of knowing.

There is nothing inherently corrupt about thinking about something. What a bizarre notion.

I work in Biotech. Not seen this either.

I don’t like the term People of Colour because it ignores people who are not (racially) white but are still fair skinned (like many East Asians). People of Colour only includes Black people. This is not a term that will suit ethnic minorities in the UK (I am an ethnic minority).

Brown was used too.
To be honest, I came away with loads of questions too

I’m ok with black and brown. But that’s not inclusive enough I dont think

That’s such an interesting point. Totally true but always taken for granted. Another othering

Those who haven't heard of Global Majority - I'm staggered about that - what sectors are you in?

Curious what sector you're in where it's so common? (sorry if I missed it).

I'm in gov policy and we say black and minority ethnic if we need to refer to a common grouping, otherwise would name the individual ethnicities or races.

I work in local government and have never heard of Global Majority, but I like the term. It's hardly a shocker mind you, because local government is probably the least woke area of the public sector I have ever come across.

It's BAME at my work.

@grapehyacinthisactuallyblue - for medical forms there is a good reason to ask ethnicity. Because the risk of certain conditions is different for different ethnicities. So, they may do different blood tests (eg to check for thalassaemia or sickle cell or do a specific diabetes test in pregnancy for certain ethnicities).

I tick the disabled box for several reasons. I loathe the word but am fine to say I have a disability, which is far more accurate as I am not just my illness. I can’t speak for other people.

As far as I am aware disabled people don't object to being lumped into a group together - or do they?

I don’t mind being lumped in a group. But to me “disabled people” is a subset of “people with disabilities” and like it or loathe it the government drives the definitions as disabled people = those who cannot work FT and “people with disabilities” = those who can work FT.

I personally loathe this binary as I do not think capacity to work is so important that there needs to be such a distinction as things like quality of life, life expectancy, and mobility are far more important factors when thinking about the impact of a disability/disabilities on a person’s life than whether or not they can be “economically active”.

I've never seen Global Majority, how accurate though! Recently I feel I've seen BIPOC most commonly.

I think it is entirely dependent on the situation.

From a health care point of view there are differences between, for want of a better word, races.

If you were to take an ECG of a normal healthy baby and do that every year it will gradually change into an adult ECG.

If the baby is white it will look like an adult ECG by the time the person is 20, if the person is black ie of African ancestry it can take until the person is 30.

Does that matter for education? Not a jot, but going into hospital with chest pain it matters.

I have no idea what the differences are between the ECGs of people who are first nations, Maori, Asian, SE Asian other ethnicity because there isn't much research.

If you are looking at educational achievement then it might be useful to both compare different groups and a white / not white because we are a white majority country, our education system was designed by and for white males.

I don't want to group people from numerous backgrounds together to sometimes it is a useful, if blunt, instrument.

On the other hand I have house shared with people from various backgrounds, some of whom have not fitted in the tick boxes because although one was Jamaican and the other African there were no boxes for 'white' under the Caribbean and African catagories.

On the other hand there are parts on UK where the kind of Christian you are matters more in terms of discrimination / non discrimination policies.

This in Capital letters.

Exactly.

You wouldn't call someone non-black.

But people are working so hard to find an acceptable term for non-white. Whatever you use it will be problematic.